Lecture Outline. Old-fashioned racism Contemporary Theories of Racism Symbolic (Modern) Racism Aversive Racism Ambivalence-Amplification Theory How prejudice affects targets Stereotype Threat Consequences of positive prejudice. Old Fashioned Racism. Premise :
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Lecture Outline • Old-fashioned racism • Contemporary Theories of Racism • Symbolic (Modern) Racism • Aversive Racism • Ambivalence-Amplification Theory • How prejudice affects targets • Stereotype Threat • Consequences of positive prejudice
Old Fashioned Racism Premise: • People are aware of their prejudice • But may try to conceal it from others
Symbolic (Modern) Racism Premise: People feel ambivalence toward the stigmatized • harbor prejudice • believe racism and discrimination are wrong
Symbolic (Modern) Racism Symbolic racists are caught between: • The prejudice they feel • The egalitarian values they espouse Not consciously aware of prejudice
Symbolic (Modern) Racism Symbolic racism manifested in disguised form: • Protestant work ethnic • opposition to affirmative action Conservative values serve to keep disadvantaged groups disadvantaged
Kinder & Sears (1981) Purpose: Test whether racial prejudice stems from: • conflict over scarce resources • belief that African Americans violate cherished values
Kinder & Sears (1981) Overview Mayoral elections in Los Angeles: • 1969 and 1973 Candidates: • Samuel Yorty: White conservative • Thomas Bradley: African American liberal What predicts voting behavior? • competition over scarce resources • symbolic racist beliefs
Kinder & Sears (1981) Election Results: 1969: Samuel Yorty won with 53% of vote 1973: Thomas Bradley won with 56% of vote
Kinder & Sears (1981) Prediction: Scarce Resources If racial prejudice stems from competition over scarce resources, then... Those Whites who are in the more competition for resources with African Americans will show greater prejudice than those who are in less competition.
Kinder & Sears (1981) Prediction: Symbolic Racism If racial prejudice stems from symbolic racism, then..... The more strongly Whites believe that African Americans violate traditional values, the more prejudice they will show.
Kinder & Sears (1981) Participants: • White residents of Los Angeles, CA • 1969 (n = 198); 1973 (n = 239) • Most lived in suburbs • Homeowners • 33% attended college • Most were Protestant, others Catholic • Nearly all were married • Most had children
Kinder & Sears (1981) Prejudice: Measured via voting behavior
Kinder & Sears (1981) Competition over scarce resources: Measured via questionnaire responses spanning four domains of racial threat.....
4 Domains of Racial Threat 1. Neighborhood desegregation & interracial social contact Example Question How strongly would you object if a member of your family wanted to bring an African American friend home to dinner
4 Domains of Racial Threat 2. Economic competition Example Question Have the economic gains of African Americans been about the same, much greater than, greater than, or less than yours over the past 5 years?
4 Domains of Racial Threat 3. Racial Busing Example Question How likely is it that African American children will be bused into the elementary schools of this neighborhood?
4 Domains of Racial Threat 4. Perceptions of African American violence Example Question How likely is it that African Americans will bring violence to this neighborhood?
Kinder & Sears (1981) Symbolic Racism: Measured via questionnaire responses spanning two domains of value systems...
2 Domains of Value Systems 1. Expressive Racism Example Question Do you think that most African Americans who receive money from welfare programs could get along without it if they tried or do they really need the help?
2 Domains of Value Systems 2. Opposition to racial busing Example Question Busing elementary school children to schools in other parts of the city only harms their education
Kinder & Sears (1981):Results Only symbolic racism significantly explained voting behavior
Kinder & Sears (1981) • For symbolic racists, prejudice is disguised as endorsement of conservative values • This enables them to believe they are non-prejudiced, while still supporting political positions that favor Whites over African Americans
Aversive Racism Premise: Also proposes that people: 1. Feel ambivalence toward the stigmatized • harbor prejudice • endorse egalitarian values that oppose racism and discrimination 2. Are not typically conscious of prejudice
Symbolic vs. Aversive Racism But, for aversive racists, egalitarian values are stronger ……..
Symbolic vs. Aversive Racism Aversive racists… • endorse liberal values • suppress prejudice when it becomes conscious
Symbolic and Aversive Racism Symbolic and Aversive racists show their prejudice on implicit behaviors that are outside of their control
Modern and Aversive Racism Both Symbolic and Aversive Racism can explain the dissociation between explicit and implicit prejudice How do they do this?
Symbolic and Aversive Racism • Not aware of prejudice on conscious level • Access egalitarian values when cognitive resources are plentiful, and report low prejudice • Ingrained prejudice accessed on implicit measures or non-monitored behaviors
Ambivalence-Amplification Theory Premise: People are ambivalent toward the stigmatized. • aversion and hostility • sympathy and compassion
Ambivalence-Amplification Theory Proposes that... 1. Ambivalence causes threat to self-esteem • No matter how one feels, that feeling is in conflict with the other way one feels
Ambivalence-Amplification Theory Proposes that... 2. People try to reduce threats to self-esteem • They justify or deny the way the feel at the moment, depending on the situation
Ambivalence-Amplification Theory Proposes that... 3. Behavior toward the stigmatized is very unstable 4. People are aware of their ambivalence
Katz & Glass (1979)Study 1 and 2 Examined how the situation affects whether people will justify or deny feeling prejudice toward a stigmatized person
Katz & Glass (1979)Study 1 Prediction: • People will justify prejudice toward a stigmatized other if the situation supports that
Katz & Glass (1979)Study 1 Procedure: 1.Male participants evaluated a confederate on 20 item impression questionnaire • liking • warmth • conceit • intelligence • adjustment
Katz & Glass (1979)Study 1 Procedure: 2.Participant was required to administer shock to confederate as feedback 3. Participant then evaluated confederate 2nd time on impression questionnaire
Katz & Glass (1979): Study 1 Manipulations: 1. Confederate race: • African American • White 2. Shock level: (no shock actually given) • strong and painful • weak and not painful
Katz & Glass (1979): Study 1 Prediction restated: People justify prejudice by denigrating stigmatized other, making that person seem unworthy and deserving of dislike. This means: Participants who gave “strong shocks” to the African American target should show greatest change in post-shock ratings (negative direction)
Results: Negative change = more negative impression after shock Positive change = more positive impression after shock As predicted, impression of African American confederate became most negative after strong shock
Katz & Glass (1979)Study 2 Prediction: • People will deny prejudice toward a stigmatized other if the situation supports that
Katz & Glass (1979): Study 2 Procedure: 1. Participant introduced to confederate 2. Participant required to insult confederate 3. Told confederate left before criticism was explained as part of the experiment 4. Participant believed experiment was over 5. Sent to office for $, where got letter from confederate.....
Katz & Glass (1979): Study 2 The letter: • Doing an independent study project • Needed one more participant • Study was on repetition • Experimental materials attached • Materials asked participant to repetitively write the same sentence over and over
Katz & Glass (1979): Study 1 Manipulations: 1. Confederate race: • African American • White 2. Insult level: • Very hurtful • Not very hurtful
Katz & Glass (1979): Study 1 Prediction restated: People will deny prejudice by going out of their way to help a stigmatized other whom they have harmed. This means: Participants who gave “hurtful insult” to the African American target should work the hardest in the repetitive experiment.
Results: Values are the average number of times repetitive sentence was written in booklet. As predicted, participants wrote the sentence more often after having harmed the African American target. No other significant differences.
Katz & Glass (1979) Conclusion: • People feel ambivalence toward stigmatized others, and respond in extreme ways toward those whom they have harmed • Sometimes behave positively, sometimes negatively depending on the situation
How Prejudice Affects Targets • Stereotype Threat (Claude Steele) • Unintended consequences of positive prejudice (Madeline Heilman)
Stereotype Threat Premise: • Stigmatized groups are aware of negative stereotypes • This awareness produces “stereotype threat”........
Stereotype Threat Definition: Fear that one will be viewed or treated in way consistent with stereotype, or that one will confirm the stereotype
Stereotype Threat • Stereotype threat is situationally induced. • Arises when target realizes that negative stereotype can explain their behavior or attributes